Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Overall I liked the movie. But it was weak in many ways. The three things that "bothered" me most about the movie were:
Spoiler
Thor made such a big deal about having his hair cut and then afterward, it was no big deal and made no difference to the story. Was it just a chance to get Stan Lee to do something other than walk by?
Also, why did they bother to rip out one of his eyes. While it was happening, he barely seemed to notice, and again, like the hair, after the blinding, Thor didn't even seem to notice or care.
In fact, Thor seemed to care more about having his hair cut than getting his eye destroyed.
And what was the point of the two assault weapons. The Marvel world is full of powerful and even exotic and even mystical weapons yet they made a big deal over two guns? Guns that are about half a man's hight yet secreted on Karl Urban's body During that whole fight on the Bifrost? Kinda lame.
1) Thor is known for long hair but you are right, Odinson seemingly accepted it at some point. A good pick-up I didn't catch from my personal dislikes of this movie by that point.
2) That I thought was a tie to Odin. That or since too many characters lost arms in Phase 2, Thor couldn't in Ragnarok based on the Odinson story after Thor lost Mjolnr in the comics in the past few years after Original Sin.
3) For Thor, it is the fish out of water deal. For Skurge, the AR-15s are exotic when to us, they are ordinary. It would be like us thinking flying saucers are novel while aliens flying them think our automobiles are.
Yes, I meant Hulk flying it, not Thor. I need more coffee.
Still, the probability of all three ending up on Sakaar is far-fetched. They should have made it so that Loki ended up there by accident, but Thor was abducted by Valkyrie.
Spoiler
You're probably right, but that would have added more time to a movie which seemed to be already perfectly timed. Also, from what I saw, it looked like Valkyrie basically hung out on Sakaar waiting for Satan's behind to spew out new garbage and lifeforms which she could sell to the Grandmaster.
But, AFtrEFkt, I think that what you said in your post #43 is the bottom line...
Quote:
Originally Posted by AFtrEFkt
See it for the VFX and the music. Just leave your brain at the door.
Because a lot of you who are posting are just adding too much logic to this movie. Also, from what was discussed on page 1, we already know that there's a lot of humor in this movie, therefore, since it broke foreign and domestic records in its debut, why not just go to this movie and find out the reason why?
Thor: Ragnarok delivered an expected #1 finish in its second weekend at the domestic box office, pushing the film's domestic total ahead of both the first and second Thor films after just ten days in release. . .
giving it a domestic total of $212,068,013 and an international total of $652,096,272.
I saw it again this past weekend, and enjoyed it more than I did on the first viewing. So I am happy to hear it's doing so well! (Especially since it's the director's first major studio movie.)
It was an enjoyable movie, I do like Thor movies out of all the other Marvel super hero series.
I'm not sure which came first in concept/execution, Wonder Woman or this Thor, because there were a few similarities between some characters and a few sequences between the two movies, if y'all know what I mean. One scene in particular, where Loki makes Valkyrie 'dream,' that entire sequence was very reminiscent of the opening scenes of WW (especially the visual effect).
I'm just saying this as a casual observer that isn't a huge comic book fan, so no need to jump all over me about either character, the background, or mythos.
I think my one complaint was there was not enough goldbloom in the film.
Who Jeff Goldbloom? He used to hot af. But I fear what the years may have done to him. The movie does look SUPER GOOD and I LOVE LOKI...but I'm not planning to see it.
It was an enjoyable movie, I do like Thor movies out of all the other Marvel super hero series.
I'm not sure which came first in concept/execution, Wonder Woman or this Thor, because there were a few similarities between some characters and a few sequences between the two movies, if y'all know what I mean. One scene in particular, where Loki makes Valkyrie 'dream,' that entire sequence was very reminiscent of the opening scenes of WW (especially the visual effect).
I'm just saying this as a casual observer that isn't a huge comic book fan, so no need to jump all over me about either character, the background, or mythos.
What similarities? Because they are both super? Wonder Woman is DC and Thor is Marvel. Sorry, just had to point that out.
I'm not sure which came first in concept/execution, Wonder Woman or this Thor, because there were a few similarities between some characters and a few sequences between the two movies, if y'all know what I mean. One scene in particular, where Loki makes Valkyrie 'dream,' that entire sequence was very reminiscent of the opening scenes of WW (especially the visual effect).
Quote:
Originally Posted by supernovai
What similarities? Because they are both super? Wonder Woman is DC and Thor is Marvel. Sorry, just had to point that out.
SubGuy is referring to the dreamlike imagery in Wonder Woman where Hippolyta tells of the creation of the gods.
Yes, there's a stylistic similarity to the visuals.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.